11 feb 2020
Oranit settlement near Qalqilya, northern occupied West Bank
The National Bureau for defending land and resisting settlements stated, in its latest weekly report, that US President Donald Trump’s adviser, Jared Kushner recently announced that Israel won’t annex Palestinian lands before the upcoming Knesset elections, thereby explaining the controversy among Likud, the government, and settlers regarding the annexation projects that the US administration stipulated in the so-called ‘Deal of the Century’.
Kushner’s statements came as Netanyahu expressed his willingness to annex Palestinian lands to Israel before the upcoming Knesset elections scheduled for the 2nd of next March, PNN further reports. At the same time, the heads of settlement councils demanded, during their meeting with Netanyahu, to impose Israeli sovereignty over the settlements in the occupied West Bank without coordination with the United States of America.
Moreover, Netanyahu added that the annexation process will take longer time, as it requires the demarcation of maps and matching them with those contained in the Trump plan, besides the necessity of coordinating them closely with the American Administration.
Concurrently, work is going on with the heads of the settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank, to ensure that all settlements are included in the decision, in accordance with the major plans outlined by the us proposal, and to ensure that these settlement blocs will not be affected by the decision, in the long run.
Within this context, the EU opposes the annexation, and affirmed that it does not recognize Israel’s sovereignty in the areas occupied in 1967, including the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Syrian Golan Heights.
As for the ‘Deal of the Century’, the EU announced that the plan exceeds the agreed upon international standards, and assured that it will continue to support the 2-state solution based on the 1967 borders.
Worth mentioning is the fact that that 100 US Democratic Party Congressmen have expressed their rejection of the “deal,” and stressed that it will push Israelis and Palestinians toward more conflict, and added that the plan paves the way for Israel to permanently occupy the West Bank, and supports the unilateral annexation of Israeli settlements with the Jordan Valley, in return for a dismantled Palestinian State, under Israeli control, and surrounded with settlements.
In parallel, Israel continues the policy of both Judaization and Israeli nationalization in Jerusalem, using various tools, including the Israeli Judiciary, which plays, particularly in Jerusalem, the role of infiltrating real-estate belonging to Palestinians, for settlement societies—especially the ‘Ateret Cohenim Settlement Association.’
Israel’s policy, in this regard, is an extension of that policy, which it initiated from the first years of the occupation, where the Judaization of Jerusalem began directly with the 1967 occupation, as Israel began the process of ethnic cleansing in the Moroccan Neighborhood, which was totally wiped out and its residents were replaced by Jewish settlers.
On June 27th of the same year, the Israeli government approved a law annexing East Jerusalem, in addition to the annexation of 14 other Palestinian villages and confiscation of the lands of 29 villages; consequently, Israel doubled the area Jerusalem, when it occupied in 1948.
Within the context of plundering the properties, lands and wealth of the Palestinian people, occupation authorities began digging a water well in the “Qadumim” settlement, naming it “Qadumim 1.” And, in the village of Jinsafoot, to the south of Qalqilia, farmers said that they lost their fertile lands as Israel expanded the “Karni Shamorn” settlement, in 1978.
Data from the population register for settlers in the West Bank, in 2019, revealed that the number of settlers increased by 3.4%, which is twice the rate of population growth in Israel. Knowing that this data does not include Jews in the occupied Jerusalem and its surroundings, whose number exceeds 300,000 settlers.
Within this context, a former member of the Knesset, and a former professor of political science at the Hebrew University, Dr. Ofer Kassiv, directed unusual and unprecedented criticism after he likened Israel to Nazi-Germany to a state on a slope that quickly slips toward fascism.
Also, the Israeli historian, Daniel Baltman, described the statements of Yitzhar settlement rabbi David Dod Kibbits, made during the funeral of settler Itamar Ben Gal, in 2018—in which he called for the extermination of the Palestinian people—as an incitement to genocide.
He described Palestinian lives in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as catastrophic, adding the people are humiliated, stylized, and imprisoned in an overcrowded ghetto. Houses are being raided and children are terrorized, living a very miserable condition, in addition to being mercilessly shot by Israeli soldiers.
The National Bureau for defending land and resisting settlements stated, in its latest weekly report, that US President Donald Trump’s adviser, Jared Kushner recently announced that Israel won’t annex Palestinian lands before the upcoming Knesset elections, thereby explaining the controversy among Likud, the government, and settlers regarding the annexation projects that the US administration stipulated in the so-called ‘Deal of the Century’.
Kushner’s statements came as Netanyahu expressed his willingness to annex Palestinian lands to Israel before the upcoming Knesset elections scheduled for the 2nd of next March, PNN further reports. At the same time, the heads of settlement councils demanded, during their meeting with Netanyahu, to impose Israeli sovereignty over the settlements in the occupied West Bank without coordination with the United States of America.
Moreover, Netanyahu added that the annexation process will take longer time, as it requires the demarcation of maps and matching them with those contained in the Trump plan, besides the necessity of coordinating them closely with the American Administration.
Concurrently, work is going on with the heads of the settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank, to ensure that all settlements are included in the decision, in accordance with the major plans outlined by the us proposal, and to ensure that these settlement blocs will not be affected by the decision, in the long run.
Within this context, the EU opposes the annexation, and affirmed that it does not recognize Israel’s sovereignty in the areas occupied in 1967, including the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Syrian Golan Heights.
As for the ‘Deal of the Century’, the EU announced that the plan exceeds the agreed upon international standards, and assured that it will continue to support the 2-state solution based on the 1967 borders.
Worth mentioning is the fact that that 100 US Democratic Party Congressmen have expressed their rejection of the “deal,” and stressed that it will push Israelis and Palestinians toward more conflict, and added that the plan paves the way for Israel to permanently occupy the West Bank, and supports the unilateral annexation of Israeli settlements with the Jordan Valley, in return for a dismantled Palestinian State, under Israeli control, and surrounded with settlements.
In parallel, Israel continues the policy of both Judaization and Israeli nationalization in Jerusalem, using various tools, including the Israeli Judiciary, which plays, particularly in Jerusalem, the role of infiltrating real-estate belonging to Palestinians, for settlement societies—especially the ‘Ateret Cohenim Settlement Association.’
Israel’s policy, in this regard, is an extension of that policy, which it initiated from the first years of the occupation, where the Judaization of Jerusalem began directly with the 1967 occupation, as Israel began the process of ethnic cleansing in the Moroccan Neighborhood, which was totally wiped out and its residents were replaced by Jewish settlers.
On June 27th of the same year, the Israeli government approved a law annexing East Jerusalem, in addition to the annexation of 14 other Palestinian villages and confiscation of the lands of 29 villages; consequently, Israel doubled the area Jerusalem, when it occupied in 1948.
Within the context of plundering the properties, lands and wealth of the Palestinian people, occupation authorities began digging a water well in the “Qadumim” settlement, naming it “Qadumim 1.” And, in the village of Jinsafoot, to the south of Qalqilia, farmers said that they lost their fertile lands as Israel expanded the “Karni Shamorn” settlement, in 1978.
Data from the population register for settlers in the West Bank, in 2019, revealed that the number of settlers increased by 3.4%, which is twice the rate of population growth in Israel. Knowing that this data does not include Jews in the occupied Jerusalem and its surroundings, whose number exceeds 300,000 settlers.
Within this context, a former member of the Knesset, and a former professor of political science at the Hebrew University, Dr. Ofer Kassiv, directed unusual and unprecedented criticism after he likened Israel to Nazi-Germany to a state on a slope that quickly slips toward fascism.
Also, the Israeli historian, Daniel Baltman, described the statements of Yitzhar settlement rabbi David Dod Kibbits, made during the funeral of settler Itamar Ben Gal, in 2018—in which he called for the extermination of the Palestinian people—as an incitement to genocide.
He described Palestinian lives in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as catastrophic, adding the people are humiliated, stylized, and imprisoned in an overcrowded ghetto. Houses are being raided and children are terrorized, living a very miserable condition, in addition to being mercilessly shot by Israeli soldiers.
|
|
President Mahmoud Abbas said today that he rejected the US so-called peace plan because of its unilateral steps and because it violates United Nations resolutions.
Speaking before the United Nations Security Council on the American so-called deal of the century presented in Washington on January 28, President Abbas said the plan annuls Palestinian legitimacy and rights to self-determination, freedom and independence while legitimizing illegal Israeli settlements and annexation of occupied Palestinian land. He urged the international community not to consider the plan as an international reference for negotiations. “It is an Israeli-American pre-emptive plan in order to put an end to the question of Palestine,” he said. The president stressed that the plan was rejected because it does not bring peace or stability to the region, rather it rewards the occupation instead of holding it accountable for its crimes, stressing that the Palestinians will confront its application on the ground. He said the US plan cancels achieving peace because it cancels all UN resolutions and all rights of the Palestinian people. He called for convening an international peace conference in the presence of Palestine and Israel and to have an international mechanism to bring real peace between the Palestinians and Israel. Fateh Standing behind Abbas following Threats by Israeli UN Delegate The Fateh movement said, today, that it stands behind PA President Mahmoud Abbas and fully supports the positions expressed in his speech before the United Nations Security Council, warning of the implications rendered by the Israeli delegate’s portrayal of Abbas as an obstacle to peace, in calling for him to step down. “This position is reminiscent of what happened to the leader Yasser Arafat when he adhered to the national constants and refused to give up the legitimate Palestinian national rights, especially on the issue of Jerusalem, refugees and an independent, sovereign Palestinian state on the June 4, 1967 borders,” said Fateh in a statement, WAFA reports. It said that “targeting the president is targeting the Palestinian people, |
targeting our national rights and our right to self-determination, freedom and independence,” stressing that it outright rejects the calls of the Israeli UN delegate and that it will defy them by all means.
Fateh said that it will continue the struggle with President Abbas, to defeat the so-called “Deal of the Century” because it is a plan to liquidate the Palestinian issue.
Fateh said that it will continue the struggle with President Abbas, to defeat the so-called “Deal of the Century” because it is a plan to liquidate the Palestinian issue.
Archbishop of Sebastia from the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem, Father Atallah Hanna, stated on Tuesday morning, that the so-called “Deal of the Century” of U.S. President D. Trump, is a conspiracy and an attempt to eliminate all inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, and added that “Jerusalem is not for sale; the conspiracy will fail like all previous attempts to eliminate the basic Palestinian rights.”
His statements came while welcoming a delegation in Beit Jala Palestinian city, near Bethlehem, south of occupied Jerusalem.
The archbishop stated that the Palestinian cause has faced numerous conspiracies and attempts to override the fundamental rights of liberty, independence, and sovereignty, but its people invariably stood steadfast, and will always defend their rights.
“Jerusalem is not for sale, is not in an auction; it is and will always be for its native and indigenous Palestinian people,” he stated, “Donald Trump, or any leader in the world, cannot void the Palestinian people, and their just cause”.
“This so-called deal is going to the dustbin of history; the Palestinians will always remain steadfast, defending their existence in the holy land,” Father Hanna added, “The word surrender does not exist in our dictionary.”
“This is our homeland; we are not foreigners, settlers or guests; Palestine is our homeland; Jerusalem is our city, our history,” he added, “The Palestinian Christians, although very few in numbers, are among the cores of the Palestinian society. We reject the Deal of the century because it aims at assassinating and eliminating our fundamental, legitimate rights.”
His statements came while welcoming a delegation in Beit Jala Palestinian city, near Bethlehem, south of occupied Jerusalem.
The archbishop stated that the Palestinian cause has faced numerous conspiracies and attempts to override the fundamental rights of liberty, independence, and sovereignty, but its people invariably stood steadfast, and will always defend their rights.
“Jerusalem is not for sale, is not in an auction; it is and will always be for its native and indigenous Palestinian people,” he stated, “Donald Trump, or any leader in the world, cannot void the Palestinian people, and their just cause”.
“This so-called deal is going to the dustbin of history; the Palestinians will always remain steadfast, defending their existence in the holy land,” Father Hanna added, “The word surrender does not exist in our dictionary.”
“This is our homeland; we are not foreigners, settlers or guests; Palestine is our homeland; Jerusalem is our city, our history,” he added, “The Palestinian Christians, although very few in numbers, are among the cores of the Palestinian society. We reject the Deal of the century because it aims at assassinating and eliminating our fundamental, legitimate rights.”
|
|
Palestine Advocacy Project has launched two billboard ads calling upon American voters and the next President of the United States to end U.S. funding for Israeli human rights violations, and restore humanitarian aid to Palestine, the Palestine News Network reported.
In 2015, the United Nations warned that Gaza could become “uninhabitable” by 2020 as a result of Israel’s blockade of and periodic wars on Gaza, which are in flagrant violation of international human rights and humanitarian law. 2020 has arrived, and Gaza’s approximately 1.8 million inhabitants sit on the brink of systemic collapse without adequate medical supplies, clean water, or electricity. |
“As Americans and people of conscience, we cannot accept our government’s ongoing attacks against Palestinian human rights and basic liberties. That’s why we demand the Democratic Party and its nominee for President take a stand for Palestinian rights and reverse decades of inhumane policy that have culminated in the horrors of the Trump presidency.”
– Clare Maxwell, board member of Palestine Advocacy Project
– Clare Maxwell, board member of Palestine Advocacy Project
The Jordanian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ayman Safadi, reiterated, on Sunday the country’s firm support of Jordan for the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, including the right to an independent state of their own, WAFA reported.
Safadi’s remarks came during a meeting with the Secretary-General of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Saeb Erekat, in Amman, on Saturday, following US President Donald Trump’s unilateral proposal for Israel-Palestine.
Safadi stated that any solution to the protracted conflict should be on the basis of the two-state solution and the Arab Peace Initiative, and that the only viable peace agreement must lead to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on the pre-1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital.
On Friday, hundreds of Jordanians rallied in the capital of Amman, near the US Embassy, showing their disapproval of the US administration’s so-called peace plan, Anadolu reported.
“Today we say that we condemn Trump’s position and consider him a criminal … [He] violated the global peace and security and [he] violated all agreements. [Trump] must be referred to the international criminal court (ICC), and Arab people everywhere must act.”
– Saleh al-Armouti, Member of the Reform Bloc, Jordan
The unilateral proposal does not meet even the most basic Palestinian demands for comprehensive peace with Israel, including the right of return for Palestinian refugees who were forced out of their homes in 1948.
Safadi’s remarks came during a meeting with the Secretary-General of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Saeb Erekat, in Amman, on Saturday, following US President Donald Trump’s unilateral proposal for Israel-Palestine.
Safadi stated that any solution to the protracted conflict should be on the basis of the two-state solution and the Arab Peace Initiative, and that the only viable peace agreement must lead to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on the pre-1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital.
On Friday, hundreds of Jordanians rallied in the capital of Amman, near the US Embassy, showing their disapproval of the US administration’s so-called peace plan, Anadolu reported.
“Today we say that we condemn Trump’s position and consider him a criminal … [He] violated the global peace and security and [he] violated all agreements. [Trump] must be referred to the international criminal court (ICC), and Arab people everywhere must act.”
– Saleh al-Armouti, Member of the Reform Bloc, Jordan
The unilateral proposal does not meet even the most basic Palestinian demands for comprehensive peace with Israel, including the right of return for Palestinian refugees who were forced out of their homes in 1948.
“Palestine not for sale,” and “No to the deal of the century,” were only few of the signs raised today by the tens of thousands of Palestinians who came from all over the West Bank to demonstrate in Ramallah city center against the American so-called deal of the century and in support of President Mahmoud Abbas as he gets ready to tell the United Nations Security Council that the American plan is bad not only for Palestine, but for the entire world, particularly international law and the world order.
“As the world watches you and all these crowds that fill the streets of Ramallah and Gaza, they will understand the Palestinian reaction (to the deal of the century),” said Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh addressing the crowds. “These people sent a message to Abu Mazen (President Abbas) that we stand behind you to bring down the deal of shame,” he said in reference to the American deal of the century. video
Standing on the podium next to Shtayyeh were members of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Fatah Central Committee and representatives of all political factions.
“We came out today against what is called the deal of the century,” Mahmoud Aloul, member of Fatah Central Committee and deputy to President Abbas in Fatah movement, told the crowds. “This gathering today sends a message that all the pressures will not lead us to give up our national constants and rights.”
The demonstrators waived the Palestinian flag as they filled Ramallah city center and carried signs saying “down with the deal of the century,” and that the Palestinians are not asking for charity but want to live in peace and dignity.
Similar mass demonstration took place in Gaza city as thousands came out to tell the world that the Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and all over the world stand together against the deal of the century.
“As the world watches you and all these crowds that fill the streets of Ramallah and Gaza, they will understand the Palestinian reaction (to the deal of the century),” said Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh addressing the crowds. “These people sent a message to Abu Mazen (President Abbas) that we stand behind you to bring down the deal of shame,” he said in reference to the American deal of the century. video
Standing on the podium next to Shtayyeh were members of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Fatah Central Committee and representatives of all political factions.
“We came out today against what is called the deal of the century,” Mahmoud Aloul, member of Fatah Central Committee and deputy to President Abbas in Fatah movement, told the crowds. “This gathering today sends a message that all the pressures will not lead us to give up our national constants and rights.”
The demonstrators waived the Palestinian flag as they filled Ramallah city center and carried signs saying “down with the deal of the century,” and that the Palestinians are not asking for charity but want to live in peace and dignity.
Similar mass demonstration took place in Gaza city as thousands came out to tell the world that the Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and all over the world stand together against the deal of the century.
10 feb 2020
It was meant to be a victory march for Netanyahu, but any peace must be based on the dissolution of the way things are
It was always foolish to expect a balanced political compromise from the current American administration.
Since he was elected four years ago, US President Donald Trump has entrusted the Israel/Palestine portfolio to his inexperienced, Zionist son-in-law, Jared Kushner, aided by two equally unqualified individuals: Ambassador David Friedman and envoy Jason Greenblatt.
Beyond this, Trump did little to hide his unseemly deference to billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who bankrolled the former reality TV star's campaign and lends unqualified support to Israel’s hard right.
For this administration, there was no need even to pretend to be balanced or to strike a political compromise, supposedly resting on a two-state solution.
Trump went further than any past pro-Israel White House, recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, giving his blessing to illegal Israeli settlements, green-lighting Israel’s annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights, and cutting funding for Palestinian humanitarian aid.
Political surrender
Trump showed no concern for promoting peace. It is thus no surprise that the “deal of the century” outlines a plan for political surrender by Palestinians, sugarcoated with economic inducements provided they give up all their rights and grievances under international law.
What is nonetheless shocking is that the Trump deal institutionalises apartheid, even asking its Palestinian victims to give their formal consent to this oppressive arrangement. Even the leaders of the South African apartheid regime never dared go this far.
Trump did not envision negotiations, but rather a victory celebration for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Israel and humiliation for Palestinians
The regime envisioned for Palestine also contains elaborate security arrangements that effectively authorise Israel to impose unlimited collective punishment against Palestinians, in defiance of international law. To hide the downgrading of Palestinian expectations, the plan embraces a perverse variant of “realism”, which can be translated as “the validation of coercion and lawlessness” at the expense of those victimised.
In presenting the plan, Kushner had the audacity to say: “I’m not looking at the world as it existed in 1967. I’m looking at the world as it exists in 2020.” This means that Israel’s demands for land and security will be satisfied, while Palestinian grievances, lacking the force of arms, can safely be put aside, in favour of some supposedly face-saving words and arrangements.
Thus, without scruple, Palestinians are being offered “self-determination” in a plan rejected by the vast majority - at best, a deformed statelet inaccurately called a “state”.
Celebration and humiliation
Perhaps to ensure a negative response from the Palestinian leadership, it was insulted throughout the plan and its presentation. Kushner summarised the Trump attitude bluntly: “You have five million Palestinians who are really trapped because of bad leadership.”
Hamas is never mentioned without the reader being reminded that it is a “terrorist” group - not the framing to be used if there was any interest in enticing the Gaza leadership to sit at a negotiating table. The Palestinian Authority does not fare much better, identified as corrupt and content with the status quo because it benefits its leaders materially.
This underscores that Trump did not envision negotiations, but rather a victory celebration for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israel and humiliation for Palestinians.
In South Africa, in a final desperate effort to stabilise the regime, small ethnic enclaves were established across the country with a semblance of home rule, but completely subordinated to the apartheid structures of hierarchy and cruel exploitation of the majority population.
The map outlined in Trump’s plan clearly resembles the South African Bantustans - non-contiguous enclaves of subjugated people, confined behind walls in their own homeland.
The offer of a Palestinian statelet, consisting mainly of urban communities in the West Bank thrown together without contiguous borders, also functions as a curtain intended to hide - or at least minimise - further Israeli land grabs.
Instead of withdrawing from the West Bank as prescribed by UN Security Council Resolution 242, Israel would take control of more than 80 percent of occupied Palestine, a reality further disguised by giving Palestinians some desert area in the uninhabitable Negev.
Cycle of violence
In 2005, Israel ostensibly took a step towards achieving peace with Palestinians through its “disengagement” from Gaza. Israeli forces were withdrawn and settlements housing thousands of Israelis were dismantled. But it soon turned out that this was not an end of occupation, but a new mode of control, seemingly even more devastating to the civilian population of the Gaza Strip.
Israel continued to control entry and exit from Gaza and retained sovereign control of its airspace and territorial waters. Interference with Gaza’s economic life caused severe hardships, accentuated by the punitive measures adopted after Hamas gained control of the territory’s governance.
These developments stimulated resistance in Gaza, with major Israeli military incursions coming in response to rockets fired from the enclave - a cycle of violence directed at the vulnerable civilian population.
What the Trump deal offers, if anything, is a worse version of post-disengagement Gaza. It confers border control exclusively on Israel, requires complete demilitarisation of the Palestinian statelet, and makes Palestinian communities completely vulnerable to Israeli military action.
If this is the “deal of the century”, it will be a dismal century for us all. Perhaps there can arise from the extremity of the unjust US proposals some helpful responses, including a unified Palestinian leadership, an insistence on a neutral intermediary to replace the US, increased global solidarity with the Palestinian struggle, and the beginning of an international effort to hold Israel accountable for its crimes against humanity.
The Trump plan was designed to add a formal stamp of approval to what was already taking place on the ground, including the emergence of an Israeli apartheid state and the continuous undermining of Palestinian rights. Any genuine diplomatic initiative for peace must be premised on the dissolution of the Israeli apartheid regime. Any other approach can only achieve, at best, a temporary ceasefire.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Richard Falk
Richard Falk is an international law and international relations scholar who taught at Princeton University for forty years. In 2008 he was also appointed by the UN to serve a six-year term as the Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights.
It was always foolish to expect a balanced political compromise from the current American administration.
Since he was elected four years ago, US President Donald Trump has entrusted the Israel/Palestine portfolio to his inexperienced, Zionist son-in-law, Jared Kushner, aided by two equally unqualified individuals: Ambassador David Friedman and envoy Jason Greenblatt.
Beyond this, Trump did little to hide his unseemly deference to billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who bankrolled the former reality TV star's campaign and lends unqualified support to Israel’s hard right.
For this administration, there was no need even to pretend to be balanced or to strike a political compromise, supposedly resting on a two-state solution.
Trump went further than any past pro-Israel White House, recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, giving his blessing to illegal Israeli settlements, green-lighting Israel’s annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights, and cutting funding for Palestinian humanitarian aid.
Political surrender
Trump showed no concern for promoting peace. It is thus no surprise that the “deal of the century” outlines a plan for political surrender by Palestinians, sugarcoated with economic inducements provided they give up all their rights and grievances under international law.
What is nonetheless shocking is that the Trump deal institutionalises apartheid, even asking its Palestinian victims to give their formal consent to this oppressive arrangement. Even the leaders of the South African apartheid regime never dared go this far.
Trump did not envision negotiations, but rather a victory celebration for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Israel and humiliation for Palestinians
The regime envisioned for Palestine also contains elaborate security arrangements that effectively authorise Israel to impose unlimited collective punishment against Palestinians, in defiance of international law. To hide the downgrading of Palestinian expectations, the plan embraces a perverse variant of “realism”, which can be translated as “the validation of coercion and lawlessness” at the expense of those victimised.
In presenting the plan, Kushner had the audacity to say: “I’m not looking at the world as it existed in 1967. I’m looking at the world as it exists in 2020.” This means that Israel’s demands for land and security will be satisfied, while Palestinian grievances, lacking the force of arms, can safely be put aside, in favour of some supposedly face-saving words and arrangements.
Thus, without scruple, Palestinians are being offered “self-determination” in a plan rejected by the vast majority - at best, a deformed statelet inaccurately called a “state”.
Celebration and humiliation
Perhaps to ensure a negative response from the Palestinian leadership, it was insulted throughout the plan and its presentation. Kushner summarised the Trump attitude bluntly: “You have five million Palestinians who are really trapped because of bad leadership.”
Hamas is never mentioned without the reader being reminded that it is a “terrorist” group - not the framing to be used if there was any interest in enticing the Gaza leadership to sit at a negotiating table. The Palestinian Authority does not fare much better, identified as corrupt and content with the status quo because it benefits its leaders materially.
This underscores that Trump did not envision negotiations, but rather a victory celebration for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israel and humiliation for Palestinians.
In South Africa, in a final desperate effort to stabilise the regime, small ethnic enclaves were established across the country with a semblance of home rule, but completely subordinated to the apartheid structures of hierarchy and cruel exploitation of the majority population.
The map outlined in Trump’s plan clearly resembles the South African Bantustans - non-contiguous enclaves of subjugated people, confined behind walls in their own homeland.
The offer of a Palestinian statelet, consisting mainly of urban communities in the West Bank thrown together without contiguous borders, also functions as a curtain intended to hide - or at least minimise - further Israeli land grabs.
Instead of withdrawing from the West Bank as prescribed by UN Security Council Resolution 242, Israel would take control of more than 80 percent of occupied Palestine, a reality further disguised by giving Palestinians some desert area in the uninhabitable Negev.
Cycle of violence
In 2005, Israel ostensibly took a step towards achieving peace with Palestinians through its “disengagement” from Gaza. Israeli forces were withdrawn and settlements housing thousands of Israelis were dismantled. But it soon turned out that this was not an end of occupation, but a new mode of control, seemingly even more devastating to the civilian population of the Gaza Strip.
Israel continued to control entry and exit from Gaza and retained sovereign control of its airspace and territorial waters. Interference with Gaza’s economic life caused severe hardships, accentuated by the punitive measures adopted after Hamas gained control of the territory’s governance.
These developments stimulated resistance in Gaza, with major Israeli military incursions coming in response to rockets fired from the enclave - a cycle of violence directed at the vulnerable civilian population.
What the Trump deal offers, if anything, is a worse version of post-disengagement Gaza. It confers border control exclusively on Israel, requires complete demilitarisation of the Palestinian statelet, and makes Palestinian communities completely vulnerable to Israeli military action.
If this is the “deal of the century”, it will be a dismal century for us all. Perhaps there can arise from the extremity of the unjust US proposals some helpful responses, including a unified Palestinian leadership, an insistence on a neutral intermediary to replace the US, increased global solidarity with the Palestinian struggle, and the beginning of an international effort to hold Israel accountable for its crimes against humanity.
The Trump plan was designed to add a formal stamp of approval to what was already taking place on the ground, including the emergence of an Israeli apartheid state and the continuous undermining of Palestinian rights. Any genuine diplomatic initiative for peace must be premised on the dissolution of the Israeli apartheid regime. Any other approach can only achieve, at best, a temporary ceasefire.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Richard Falk
Richard Falk is an international law and international relations scholar who taught at Princeton University for forty years. In 2008 he was also appointed by the UN to serve a six-year term as the Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights.
In his first statement as chairperson of the African Union (AU) South Africa’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa, on Sunday compared US President Donald Trump’s “Peace Plan” for Palestine to that of apartheid South Africa’s Bantustan system.
“It brought to mind a horrible history that we, as South Africa, went through. The apartheid regime once imposed a Bantustan system on the people of South Africa without consulting them,” said Ramaphosa. He was speaking in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, during the 33rd African Union Summit, held under the theme "Silencing the Guns: Creating Conducive Conditions For Africa’s Development."
Ramaphosa said that as he listened to Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh's speech on the Trump plan, “it sounds like this plan has been consulted without all the people that matter – especially the Palestinians - and it sounds like a Bantustan type of construct."
Ramaphosa was referring to disjointed territories set aside for black inhabitants of South Africa and South West Africa (now Namibia), as part of the policy of apartheid. While Pretoria claimed that these were independent, sovereign states where citizens had full rights, the homelands were - in reality - under the complete control of the apartheid regime.
Under Trump’s plan, Israel would annex over 30% of the West Bank – the site of a future Palestinian state. The plan creates a demilitarized Palestinian state on a series of disconnected patches of land. Palestinians would have no control over its own security, borders, waters, and foreign policy, ceding these to Israel.
Ramaphosa's statements came after the president of the African Union Commission, Moussa Faki Mahamat, told the assembled heads of state that the plan, published at the end of January, represented a “violation of multiple resolutions of the United Nations and the African Union.”
Mahamat said Trump's peace plan was prepared by himself without international consultation and that he "trampled on the rights of the Palestinian people.”
Mahamat reiterated “the solidarity of the AU with the Palestinian people in their legitimate search for an independent and sovereign state with East Jerusalem as capital."
Palestinian political factions expressed their united opposition to Trump’s plan and welcomed Ramaphosa and Mahamat’s comments in Addis Ababa.
Palestine solidarity activists across the continent also reacted positively to the AU’s condemnation of the Trump deal.
“The so-called deal of the century is nothing but a one-sided load of trash,” said Ras Mubarak of the Ghana Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC).
“It is a war crime and cannot be accepted as a basis for achieving lasting peace between Palestine and Israel,” said Robson Musarafu of Zimbabwe Friends of Palestine.
“This is the sensible position that African countries individually must take,” said Moeti Mohwasa secretary-general of the Botswana National Front and head of communications of the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC).
Some activists, however, were frustrated by the contradictions between the strong words of the AU and the actions of its individual member states.
“The AU consistently condemns Israeli violations of international law and human rights. African countries call out Israel by supporting AU statements but then go back home and develop strong relations with the Netanyahu regime. Statements lacking practical measures to give substance to words will not work. African leaders must give the Palestinians more than nice words,” said Johannesburg-based writer, Suraya Dadoo.
“It brought to mind a horrible history that we, as South Africa, went through. The apartheid regime once imposed a Bantustan system on the people of South Africa without consulting them,” said Ramaphosa. He was speaking in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, during the 33rd African Union Summit, held under the theme "Silencing the Guns: Creating Conducive Conditions For Africa’s Development."
Ramaphosa said that as he listened to Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh's speech on the Trump plan, “it sounds like this plan has been consulted without all the people that matter – especially the Palestinians - and it sounds like a Bantustan type of construct."
Ramaphosa was referring to disjointed territories set aside for black inhabitants of South Africa and South West Africa (now Namibia), as part of the policy of apartheid. While Pretoria claimed that these were independent, sovereign states where citizens had full rights, the homelands were - in reality - under the complete control of the apartheid regime.
Under Trump’s plan, Israel would annex over 30% of the West Bank – the site of a future Palestinian state. The plan creates a demilitarized Palestinian state on a series of disconnected patches of land. Palestinians would have no control over its own security, borders, waters, and foreign policy, ceding these to Israel.
Ramaphosa's statements came after the president of the African Union Commission, Moussa Faki Mahamat, told the assembled heads of state that the plan, published at the end of January, represented a “violation of multiple resolutions of the United Nations and the African Union.”
Mahamat said Trump's peace plan was prepared by himself without international consultation and that he "trampled on the rights of the Palestinian people.”
Mahamat reiterated “the solidarity of the AU with the Palestinian people in their legitimate search for an independent and sovereign state with East Jerusalem as capital."
Palestinian political factions expressed their united opposition to Trump’s plan and welcomed Ramaphosa and Mahamat’s comments in Addis Ababa.
Palestine solidarity activists across the continent also reacted positively to the AU’s condemnation of the Trump deal.
“The so-called deal of the century is nothing but a one-sided load of trash,” said Ras Mubarak of the Ghana Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC).
“It is a war crime and cannot be accepted as a basis for achieving lasting peace between Palestine and Israel,” said Robson Musarafu of Zimbabwe Friends of Palestine.
“This is the sensible position that African countries individually must take,” said Moeti Mohwasa secretary-general of the Botswana National Front and head of communications of the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC).
Some activists, however, were frustrated by the contradictions between the strong words of the AU and the actions of its individual member states.
“The AU consistently condemns Israeli violations of international law and human rights. African countries call out Israel by supporting AU statements but then go back home and develop strong relations with the Netanyahu regime. Statements lacking practical measures to give substance to words will not work. African leaders must give the Palestinians more than nice words,” said Johannesburg-based writer, Suraya Dadoo.
